Thank you, Mr. Chair.
If I have any time left at the end of my question, I will share it with my colleague, Mr. Vandal.
I would like to discuss education, the roadmap and immigration. However, earlier, you mentioned the term “duality” three times.
I am from New Brunswick, where the concept of duality is not synonymous with bilingualism. Our province is officially bilingual, and the term “duality” means that there are two leaders—one francophone and one anglophone—in very specific sectors. That's what duality is at home. In fact, when we talk about duality, my natural tendency is to say, “Oh”. In New Brunswick, we have a francophone department of education and an anglophone one. There are never any disputes over fund transfers. Without going into details, I would say that the funding is allocated on a per capita basis.
My question may be of a legal nature.
We will read your brief later—perhaps some have done so already—but does it contain any legal arguments related to section 23 of the charter? We all know that education is a provincial responsibility. Federal transfers to the provinces must respect the obligations set out in the charter, in particular, section 23. Provinces are required to report on how they are distributing and managing that money. The money comes from the federal government, which is subject to the charter provisions. Has that argument been put forward already, legally speaking?